A New Star Trek Show Will Need a Stronger Focus on Characterization

Re: A New Star Trek Show Will Need a Stronger Focus on Characterizatio

The supporting cast work if:

a) You use them in scenarios where their established skill set is required
b) You give them regular guest characters to bounce off
c) You put them in scenes without the main leads (i.e. multiple support characters together)
d) You use them as the focus of their own story at least once per season

Re: A New Star Trek Show Will Need a Stronger Focus on Characterizatio

I hope they won't be romancing and sexing everybody up. If they make a new show, I hope they won't make more of the "Newkirk" types. I want some heroic heroes who aren't constantly crying or thinking about love. I would love some of the TOS or TNG feel. I like all the characters in those shows. (Except that terrible Yarr!! And Wes is a bit.. yeah)

Re: A New Star Trek Show Will Need a Stronger Focus on Characterizatio

Personally, I would like to see a show based in the main timeline, but something like 100+ years after the destruction of Romulus, and the following war between the Klingons and Federation.

I don't know exactly what sort of premise, exactly, but here are some of my ideas:

1. The Federation and what's left of the Romulans are finally at peace. Vulcan in particular has extended its helping hand to surviving Romulans and helped them found "New Romulus" Some Romulans accept the ways logic like their Vulcan cousins, others remain true to their Romulan ways, but less aggressive and in fact feel (if grudgingly) a debt of honor owed to the Federation.

2. The Klingon Empire and the Federation are now at an uneasy peace, but not allies. The Klingons lost the war (as fought in Star Trek Online) with the Federation, at a great cost to both sides. Efforts exist on both sides in re-solidifying the alliance the Klingons and Federation once shared, but there are elements on both sides that oppose such actions (some Klingon houses bitter over the loss of the war, and some within Starfleet don't trust the Klingons).

3. Following the events of Voyager Endgame, the virus Future Admiral Janeway introduced has decimated the Borg. The Borg Queen suffered her final and true death. This resulted in the Borg losing its sense order and direction, without her leadership. This resulted in the Borg civilization collapsing, much as it did on a smaller scale as seen in Descent. The Borg have splintered into 3 types of factions:

a. The Borg Remnant: Some Borg are attempting to operate as it did once before, but at a far lesser level of efficiency, and are left rudderless and without direction. They are nowhere near the menace the Borg once were, and often operate in a malfunctioning state, and the fact that the Federation has developed weapons that can now easily repel and defeat them. Rather than conquer and assimilate entire worlds, these have devolved more into raiders of smaller outposts and smaller settlements unable to defend themselves, or prey on wayward vessels that cross their path. They are more akin to marauders, more interested in acquiring raw materials to sustain their dilapidated tattered Cubes and Spheres, only resorting to assimilation if there is a clear and logical reason.

b. The Maxima Culpa: Some have rejected their machine side and attempted to live more as organics desiring to coexist peacefully with the Federation and other Alpha Quadrant powers. Since these former Borg are made up of so many different species from across the galaxy, and the fact that many of their home planets and respective species have not survived assimilation (and to those that have survived, the former Borg are pariahs), these former Borg have banded together and formed their own civilization, as all others reject them, calling themselves the Maxima Culpa. In fact, these former Borg, the Maxima Culpa, feel a deep sense of guilt and shame of their time as the Borg, and wish to make ammends for their past crimes. They are attempting to reach out to the Federation and countless other worlds that have been affected by the Borg in an effort to assist them using their enhanced abilities and technology to help in any way possible, much as 7 of 9 once did. Yet many across the galaxy wonder if these overtures are sincere, or if this is an attempt at reconquest, so many civilizations, including the Federation are wary of the Maxima Culpa.

c. The Hive: The third and most powerful of factions of the Borg have "purified" themselves of their organic elements is the Hive. The Hive see organic elements of the Borg as imperfect and unstable, and even see the organic side of Queen having been destroyed by Janeway's infection as the cause of the Borg's downfall. So this new faction has become completely machine, with a new sense of purpose: no longer interested in assimilation, the Hive intends to exterminate all organic life in the galaxy and replace all organic life with living machines of perfection.

Re: A New Star Trek Show Will Need a Stronger Focus on Characterizatio

I find shows like Game of Thrones, and most HBO dramas, highly gratuitous, personally. It's like they're trying too hard to be edgy and 'adult' , with all the naughty bits, and swear words. Much like Torchwood.[/QUOTE]

They are popular. Wouldn't want Star Trek to be popular.

I want some heroic heroes who aren't constantly crying or thinking about love. I would love some of the TOS or TNG feel. [/QUOTE]

Absolutely! Men shouldn't cry. That's makes them squishy and f$ggoty. Love is squishy and f#ggoty. No one likes S E X. Sex is icky. Sex is squishy. Sex is f#ggoty.

A new Star Trek show will need a stronger focus on characterization, it can't have bland one note characters like Harry Kim or Travis Mayweather who add nothing to the show. If a character is on show they should serve a real purpose and be important and compelling.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid modern free-to-air TV isn't trending towards the inclusion of "important and compelling" characters. The ubiquitous "Law and Order", "CSI" and "NCIS" shows seem to be populated with a large cast of cyphers who can be, and are, quite interchangeable. When discussing episodes over the watercooler, I find myself saying, "that woman who has a secret past", "the grey haired boss", or the "geeky computer girl", to identify the characters. Something that never happened to me with ST TV series of the past.

The other big cleverness aspect of those shows is a move towards segments that resemble a music video. Special effects that take us unto the human body, replay a theory for a murder scene, or show the wacky science fictiony ease of enhancing CCTV footage on holographic screens to gather evidence and leads.

When such shows going into endless repeat, it becomes a bizarre experience seeing the revolving door of actors saying the lines.

Also, those (many) episodes that end in a cliffhanger! It may have worked in first-run primetime, but catching Part 2 of a show that can pop up in a new timeslot every week is becoming impossible - and must be even worse in the US where you've always had so many channels.

Even worse: the programmers Down Under are typically pairing one new episode (be it "Law and Order", "CSI" or "NCIS") with one "classic" episode of the same title in telemovie-sized chunks. Up comes "To be continued", and after the commercial break, you're jumping back in history by several years, with many different castmembers seemingly, suddenly, stepping back in roles.

And you thought the time jumps in "Lost" were confusing? At least they were scripted jumps!

A new Star Trek show will need a stronger focus on characterization, it can't have bland one note characters like Harry Kim or Travis Mayweather who add nothing to the show. If a character is on show they should serve a real purpose and be important and compelling.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid modern free-to-air TV isn't trending towards the inclusion of "important and compelling" characters. The ubiquitous "Law and Order", "CSI" and "NCIS" shows seem to be populated with a large cast of cyphers who can be, and are, quite interchangeable. When discussing episodes over the watercooler, I find myself saying, "that woman who has a secret past", "the grey haired boss", or the "geeky computer girl", to identify the characters. Something that never happened to me with ST TV series of the past.

The other big cleverness aspect of those shows is a move towards segments that resemble a music video. Special effects that take us unto the human body, replay a theory for a murder scene, or show the wacky science fictiony ease of enhancing CCTV footage on holographic screens to gather evidence and leads.

When such shows going into endless repeat, it becomes a bizarre experience seeing the revolving door of actors saying the lines.

Also, those (many) episodes that end in a cliffhanger! It may have worked in first-run primetime, but catching Part 2 of a show that can pop up in a new timeslot every week is becoming impossible - and must be even worse in the US where you've always had so many channels.

Even worse: the programmers Down Under are typically pairing one new episode (be it "Law and Order", "CSI" or "NCIS") with one "classic" episode of the same title in telemovie-sized chunks. Up comes "To be continued", and after the commercial break, you're jumping back in history by several years, with many different castmembers seemingly, suddenly, stepping back in roles.

And you thought the time jumps in "Lost" were confusing? At least they were scripted jumps!

Click to expand...

That's why everyone says all the good TV is on cable, with shows that have characters with defined personalities and great ongoing stories.

Breaking Bad and Game of thrones are better rearguard then CSI and Law and Order, because the former has better plots and characterization then the later.